Bleeding from the Bunghole

[Tony Parsehole]

"When charismatic satnd-up comedian Bjarte Foshaug was bitten by a pair of radioactive grey corduroy trousers he transformed into SPECTACULARLY UNFUNNY MAN!!"

[TedDahlberg]

I was looking at some Skepchick photos on Flickr and found this one of Amanda Marcotte trying to look seductive:

MarcottageCheeseDischarge.jpg

The thing is, what's that expression on Phil Plait's face? Is it lust? Disgust? I just can't decide.

And is it her own hand she's eating or someone else's?

[James Caruthers]

I was looking at some Skepchick photos on Flickr and found this one of Amanda Marcotte trying to look seductive:

MarcottageCheeseDischarge.jpg

The thing is, what's that expression on Phil Plait's face? Is it lust? Disgust? I just can't decide.

It looks like that lady is trying to gnaw her arm off in a desperate attempt to escape his company.

[Southern]

A day in the trenchs for a SJ Warrior though I'm a little sympathetic

588
Dalillama, Schmott Guy

6 November 2013 at 3:59 pm (UTC -6)

Fucking Hell!!!! Something’s gong wrong with my unemploymeny benefits, and I haven’t gotten them this week, and after waitng 3 fucking hours to talk to someone, they transferred me to a voicemail queue.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-715484

Finally, a SJW problem that I can relate to. Not that I'm currently unemployed, but it happens to people from time to time - and the worst thing for your head is having your unemplyment benefits cut off for some bureaucratic bullshit while you're still looking ofr something else. I choose to believe that this is the case for Dalilama, and not the easy pick target.

[Tony Parsehole]

Yeah....
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7399/1072 ... a6eb7e.jpg
That works.

[James Caruthers]

You see how hard it is to replicate Bjarte's "absence of comedy"?
Even an annotated, monotone picture of a car engine is funnier than the shit he comes out with.

I don't think all of those parts consented to penetrate and be penetrated by the other parts. I smell rape. Not to mention, forced rape victims. That crankshaft is totally an ogvorbis-style forced rapist.

[bovarchist]

I was looking at some Skepchick photos on Flickr and found this one of Amanda Marcotte trying to look seductive:

MarcottageCheeseDischarge.jpg

The thing is, what's that expression on Phil Plait's face? Is it lust? Disgust? I just can't decide.

If she keeps eating her hand she's not going to be hungry for lunch.

[Southern]

You know, if we could all collectively migrate away from Google, that'd be great.

The new youtube update is here. This one forces you to be signed in to google+ in order to comment, seems to remove the thumbs up/thumbs down comment features (sometimes, it may also be a bug), and forces you to manually select the option if you want comments to be sorted with the newest appearing first.

Youtube can kiss my ass. They're becoming more and more like a standard cable company, or maybe more like Xbox Live. Ads out the ass, no features or customization options and obnoxious updates that you must accept, or you cannot use your youtube account anymore.

[youtube]VVDAk0eK2Wo[/youtube]

Oh, I hated that "forcing you to have a google+" thing. Assholes, I don't want your stupid failure of a social network - In fact I don't want ANY social network whatsoever. That wasn't what made you big, you're becoming exactly like fucking Microsoft and their "shove IE with the operational system with no option to uninstall it", and you all can go fuck yourselves with that shit.

[TedDahlberg]

"When charismatic satnd-up comedian Bjarte Foshaug was bitten by a pair of radioactive grey corduroy trousers he transformed into SPECTACULARLY UNFUNNY MAN!!"

But which shade of grey were they!? #808080 or #7F7F7F? As we've learned from the great man himself, there's a whole rainbow of grey.

[Dick Strawkins]

I was looking at some Skepchick photos on Flickr and found this one of Amanda Marcotte trying to look seductive:

MarcottageCheeseDischarge.jpg

The thing is, what's that expression on Phil Plait's face? Is it lust? Disgust? I just can't decide.

That's not Phil Plait - it's George Hrab.
They look very similar but Plait is hairier.

Here's Plait, being respectful to women (incidently at the same party that Pamela Gay almost got groped!)

http://i.imgur.com/Yul9AP0.jpg

(To protect the anonymity of the poor woman in that incident, I've obscured her face with another image chosen for it's emotional neutrality, that of Janet Leigh in 'Psycho')

[Michael K Gray]

Best Bfarte Fauxshag Cartoon ever, as voted by O'Feelya Bentsome:
http://www.michaelgray.com.au/Resources/BestBjarte.jpg

HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha!

A social-justice riot.

[Dick Strawkins]

At the same party, another shocking chest groping incident!

http://i.imgur.com/SpMu7zi.jpg

Poor Phil - you see the PTSD kicking in.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

A day in the trenchs for a SJ Warrior though I'm a little sympathetic

588
Dalillama, Schmott Guy

6 November 2013 at 3:59 pm (UTC -6)

Fucking Hell!!!! Something’s gong wrong with my unemploymeny benefits, and I haven’t gotten them this week, and after waitng 3 fucking hours to talk to someone, they transferred me to a voicemail queue.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-715484

Finally, a SJW problem that I can relate to. Not that I'm currently unemployed, but it happens to people from time to time - and the worst thing for your head is having your unemplyment benefits cut off for some bureaucratic bullshit while you're still looking ofr something else. I choose to believe that this is the case for Dalilama, and not the easy pick target.

Yup, same here. When I used to get benefits, it was a fucking pain in the arse to deal with those delays and administrative bullshit. Thankfuly, I don't get benefits anymore, so I know I'm poor without the worries of paperwork.

[Pogsurf]

"Trigger warning for ableism, bullying, repeated ignoring of people with disabilities, and hostility to accessibility."

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 085#p97085

Thanks for warning me for "hostility to accessibility". I don't think I could have handled the shock of encountering such hostility without advance warning. I'm better prepared now; I have the spoons for it as you people say. But what if I'm triggered by trigger warnings?

Trigger warning: trigger warning

Nah, that wouldn't work.

Fuck, I need a trigger warning for PC language.

True story. A little while back PZ Myers e-mailled me and told me to fuck off. I thought I would respect the message of his communication whilst entirely ignoring the spirit. I tried to devise a way of annoying him that did not involve contacting him directly.

Atheist Ireland were hosting Empowering Women Through Secularism and Myers was on the panel to speak. I devised a quiz about the anal rape culture that Myers' blog used to be so happy to expouse and sent it off to all the other panelists.

A few of the panelists did get back in touch with me, including one who felt that my material should include a trigger warning. I wrote back with my honest answer which was that I didn't know how to construct one and that if she could offer assistance I would try to write one. She asked me not to contact her again, so the matter was dropped.

Seeing Jan's comment above reminded to try to look up where the phrase "Trigger warning" has come from. Presumably with all these skeptics bandying it around as best practice it is backed up by tons of research and lots of trial data as to how to make the best one. I found the only site willing to give a definition was that well known peer reviewed journal 'Urban Dictionary'.

As a serious question, is anyone aware of how or where the term "trigger warning" came into existence? Is it just a piece of SJW mythology, or has someone actually offered this up as a proper response to a real problem?

[Trophy]

At the same party, another shocking chest groping incident!

http://i.imgur.com/SpMu7zi.jpg

Poor Phil - you see the PTSD kicking in.

LOL. The location of the other lady's hands are left to your imagination...

[Michael K Gray]

Finally, a SJW problem that I can relate to. Not that I'm currently unemployed, but it happens to people from time to time - and the worst thing for your head is having your unemplyment benefits cut off for some bureaucratic bullshit while you're still looking ofr something else. I choose to believe that this is the case for Dalilama, and not the easy pick target.

That is a phenomenon totally foreign to those who are self-employed.
Vis: Not wage-slaves.
Totalise that barge, elevator that bail.

Yes, I am a minor Libertarian on that count.
I have been "employed" for 3 months, and just HAD to escape.
I have been my own boss ever since.
(~40 years)

I never ceases to amuse me when wage-slaves (employees) complain bitterly about how the company for whom they slave are "not doing it right"! They flail-about, giving suggestion after suggestion about how their employer could be running THEIR business in a superior fashion for the employees.
Well, if you know better, then why don't you do what they did, and establish a company at your own financial risk and prove them wrong, rather that simply complaining about it to anyone who will listen, and many who don't?
Mortgage your house, sell your first-born to Mephistopheles, and see what it is like from "the other side of the coin".

[AnonymousCowherd]

Sigh. PTSD from the Internet. Probably the most pathetic thing I've heard people self-diagnose themselves with in a very, very long time. Pssst.

You need to read more Caine:

http://i.imgur.com/f0Fwbjc.png

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-713446

All I can think is WTF? My brain actually cramped reading that.

I can do that with our TV. I just won't let anyone else use the remote.

[AnonymousCowherd]

A happy confluence of links explains Ophelia's appreciation of Bjartetoons.

http://i.imgur.com/oe0t0tq.png

I think it is becoming clear that the pit is the audience they play to most - the baboons are a given, and no-one else gives a shit. We bag them, Oaphie has to "respond". If this keeps up we'll be setting their whole blogging agenda.

It is to laugh.

[AnonymousCowherd]

Yeah....
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7399/1072 ... a6eb7e.jpg
That works.

Hasn't that photo just captured the moment that someone else's echt bitchslap connected with Marcott's gob? Glasses dude looks like he's taking notes.

[Tony Parsehole]

Best Bfarte Fauxshag Cartoon ever, as voted by O'Feelya Bentsome:
http://www.michaelgray.com.au/Resources/BestBjarte.jpg

HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha!

A social-justice riot.

See? Even that is funnier than the original Foshaug's.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ns-twitter

[Apples]

LeftSidePositive makes sure Chris Rodda's recent Helen Keller joke is properly shamed at the A+forum:

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 085#p97085

LSP, of course, is the shitstain fembot wingnut who let Paul Loebe drive her to shrieking distraction in fine style.

How hard is it, really, to see when humor is punching down and when it's punching up?

Yes, how hard is it, really? Stupid, sanctimonious fucks. Helen Keller jokes are "punching up" jokes. She wasn't some random, tragic deaf-and-blind person -- she is a world-famous American saint who graduated from Radcliffe, published a dozen books, and had a beloved play and film made about her. She's like an American Gandhi -- permanently glued to the pedestal. Jokes about Helen Keller's being a blithering idiot are funny because she was in fact so brilliantly accomplished. Irony - how the fuck does it work?

[AnonymousCowherd]

I was looking at some Skepchick photos on Flickr and found this one of Amanda Marcotte trying to look seductive:

MarcottageCheeseDischarge.jpg

The thing is, what's that expression on Phil Plait's face? Is it lust? Disgust? I just can't decide.

That's not Phil Plait - it's George Hrab.
They look very similar but Plait is hairier.

Here's Plait, being respectful to women (incidently at the same party that Pamela Gay almost got groped!)

http://i.imgur.com/Yul9AP0.jpg

(To protect the anonymity of the poor woman in that incident, I've obscured her face with another image chosen for it's emotional neutrality, that of Janet Leigh in 'Psycho')

For crying out loud...won't someone start a fundraiser to buy these guys a decent shirt. We won't even talk about the pants.
Because they are complete.

[jet_lagg]

How can you tell he 'refuted' the criticism when you don't understand the maths?

Because I do understand the math. As Carrier has pointed out. It doesn't take anything beyond a six grade understanding. The rest is learning about application and the underlying logic.

The following citation from Carriers reply will cause all mathematically literate people to fall from their chairs howling with laughter.

I readily concede that my colloquial discourse will lead to ambiguities that chafe at mathematicians; but this is precisely the kind of shit they need to get over, because they are simply not going to be able to communicate with people in the humanities if they don’t learn how to strategically use ambiguity to increase the intelligibility of the concepts they want to relate.

It’s like Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle: you can have precision with unintelligibility to almost everyone but extremely erudite specialists, or you can have ambiguity but with intelligibility to everyone else. The more ambiguity, the greater the clarity, but the lower the precision. This is a fundamental principle of all nonfiction literature, especially any popularization of scientific or mathematical concepts to a nonscientific, nonmathematical public.

[/quote]



Considering his book was peer reviewed by a professional mathematician specializing in bayes, and the two mathematicians he was discussing this with didn't fall over laughing, your point is obviously refuted. You appear to prefer sarcasm to logic (i.e. even if most mathematicians did fall over laughing, that doesn't demonstrate Carrier is wrong about that one point, let alone that he's wrong about every point he makes in the book).

Look, if historians want to use mathematics in their research they will have to learn actual mathematics; not Carriers sloppy, informal stuff that is loaded with ambiguity. There is no royal road to mathematics.

The book teaches actual mathematics. The application is different than what mathematicians are used to, because they're being used in a different field for different purposes. Anyway, I think we're done here.

If you reply, try actually engaging with the logic of the threads I directed your toward (or something from the actual book).

[jet_lagg]

Carrier begins his defense by claiming that all the criticism that he has ever heard, EVER, about his theory, can be addressed by 'read the book' or 'read the book more carefully'.

He ends stating how he's not impressed with any of this criticism, after a typical long-winded tour de farce describing that he couldn't possibly be wrong, because reasons.

How do you see him treating criticism of his scholarship seriously there? He also doesn't adjust his positions; he begins and ends with saying all the criticism of him ever is wrong.

You're sure you're not the Dick Carrier?

I'm pretty sure I'm not Dick Carrier, but I've been wrong about things in the past. ;)

Anyway, if you think Carrier is an arrogant fuck (you're definitely not alone if that's what you think), I'm not going to argue about that with you. Just not interested in that conversation.

Meanwhile you haven't actually shown he doesn't take criticism seriously. The fact that he took the time to summarize and refute the criticism (rather than just ignoring it or handwaving it away) shows that he takes it seriously. The tone he does it in is irrelevant to me, and I think it should be to you as well. I'm not suggesting everyone run out and become the man's friend. I'm saying his book on bayes theorem is good.

There's a few questions we can ask to test whether you're Dick Carrier or not.

1) Do you have a legion of fans?
1a) If so, do they span the globe?

2) If you were to lend your support to a cause which of the sentences below would be the most accurate metaphor to describe that support?:
a) Cleverness Howitzer
b) Barrage of brightness
c) Intellectual artillery

3) How many times did you masturbate in front of the mirror today?:
a) None
b) More than once but less than ten
c) Ten or more times but less than thirty
d) Until your spunk ran out and only foam came out of the end.

4) If somebody called you the saviour of humanity would you think they were:
a) Lying
b) Deluded
c) Joking
d) Sycophantic but wrong
e) Dead-on accurate

:lol:

[windy]

Meanwhile, the naive north European is about to be careened on the highway for questing the ontology of ass grabbing harassment. Too bad they don't know what is about to hit them. This is going to be ugly.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-715607

Wait, why does PZ think a "skeptic leader" did the ass slapping?

In the TAM talk she said:

As an astronomer, at professional conferences, I’ve randomly had my tits and ass grabbed and slapped by men in positions of power and by creeps who drank too much. This is part of what it means to be a woman in science.

Now she's retconned it to:

I learned that a witnesses to an event that occurred in 2008 is discussing that event and naming names. During the event in question, a man in power who I’d previously never met made a lunge at my breasts. This is one of the events that weighed on me when I wrote my TAM talk. It weighed on me when I said, “As an astronomer, at conferences, I’ve randomly had my tits and ass grabbed and slapped by men in positions of power and by creeps who drank too much. This is part of what it means to be a woman in science and skepticism.”

Dumbass edited her own quote, when the original is publicly available!

I guess she's found that random groping accusations have a much more receptive audience in skepticism than in astronomy. "A good story improves in the telling"

[windy]

Best Bfarte Fauxshag Cartoon ever, as voted by O'Feelya Bentsome:
http://www.michaelgray.com.au/Resources/BestBjarte.jpg

HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha! HA! Ha!

A social-justice riot.

See? Even that is funnier than the original Foshaug's.

It's like those "Garfield minus Garfield" comics:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/98331f470f9c ... o1_500.png

[Dick Strawkins]

It's a fascinating yet simultaneously mundane story, that underlies the latest episode in the ongoing skeptic soap opera.
Pamela Gay's post seems to (intentionaly?) conflate a work related harassment investigation that has recently concluded, and a seperate incident from 2008 that she claims involves some famous skeptic trying to grope her. I'm pretty certain I've narrowed the possibilities of the latter incident to DragonCon 2008, and specifically to a party on Thurday night, the 30th of August.
On that night Phil Plait, the then head of the JREF, bumped into the SF author Scott Sigler, who invited him to a party.
Plait said he had 12 friends - No problem! Bring them along too!
The party was a themed event, namely 'Pimps and Ho's' (yes, another prostitute themed event) which explains many of the costumes you see in the photos I've posted already.
The party was being hosted by podcaster Evo Terra/Travis Unwin (the guy ogling Pamela Gay's left breast in this photo)
http://i.imgur.com/FrcvSnh.jpg
There are a lot of photos of this event online and it's clear that there was copious amounts of alcohol consumed, lots of touching/hugging/groping going on. I'm guessing that there was a lot of play-acting happening (which explains the many silly photos of people mugging up to Scott Sigler in his pimp costume.)
At some stage something happened, it appears, between Pamela Gay and Michael Shermer.
We have photos of them together, posing for photos, with Shermer's arm around her.

http://i.imgur.com/20vC9Cs.jpg

She claims he tried to grope her, but he says he didn't.
Others who were there seem to think he was very drunk and they seperated him from her and took him away.
I think it's safe to say he was probably drunk and acting the dick - although it is questionable whether he did anything (or tried to to anything) worse than was already happening at the party - or whether he just tried to give her a hug that was misinterpreted.
I wasn't there so I can't say what happened but I find it hard to make a firm pronouncement on the matter when no actual contact was made. Nearly groping someone, when no contact is made, can be very similar to nearly hugging them - and it's clear there was a lot of hugging going on at that party. Shermer is the only one who knows what he intended to do. Perhaps he intended to grab a breast in each hand, give them a squeeze and go "Waheeeyy!"
Or perhaps not.
We need a youtube clip of the incident to help us decide.

Or perhaps Peezus can help us!

Peezus, can you point out exactly where that nasty Mr Shermer tried to touch the lady?

http://i.imgur.com/PFsrTCZ.jpg

[Pogsurf]

From the Spambot filter question:

Which is not a European capital city? Paris, London, Amsterdam, Rome, Beijing:

Tricky one, Amsterdam is not a capital city and Beijing is not in Europe.

[BarnOwl]

Over on Ophelia's version of the Pamela Gay drama (on which she bestows a title similar to those for her preceding posts on FGM), a commenter writes:

brucegee1962
November 6, 2013 at 9:44 pm (UTC -8) Link to this comment
My young daughter is going to be gorgeous, and she loves math. I tell her every day how proud I am of her, and how great it would be if she decides to go into engineering or science.

Posts like this make me wonder if I’m doing the right thing as a dad. Maybe I should be encouraging her to study languages or English Lit, where the balance is a lot closer to 50-50.

That makes me SO ANGRY on her behalf, and the behalf of all the current and future woman scientists.

ARGH!

I don't know where to begin to parse the stupid, so I'll just ask why it's relevant that she's going to be "gorgeous"? It's quite obvious, from all of the many groping/harassment/RAEP stories that have been presented as blog posts, comments, #ripplesoftweetwoe, TAM talks, etc etc, that being "gorgeous" is not a prerequisite for being a target. Being a scientist or being "brilliant" at maths and physics isn't a requirement either. So why is that even part of the dialogue? If they're so disgusted with oppressive white patriarchoindustrialcomplex notions of beauty, why do they constantly conform to them and refer to dominant paradigms of physical attractiveness?

[Southern]

Finally, a SJW problem that I can relate to. Not that I'm currently unemployed, but it happens to people from time to time - and the worst thing for your head is having your unemplyment benefits cut off for some bureaucratic bullshit while you're still looking ofr something else. I choose to believe that this is the case for Dalilama, and not the easy pick target.

That is a phenomenon totally foreign to those who are self-employed.
Vis: Not wage-slaves.
Totalise that barge, elevator that bail.

Yes, I am a minor Libertarian on that count.
I have been "employed" for 3 months, and just HAD to escape.
I have been my own boss ever since.
(~40 years)

I never ceases to amuse me when wage-slaves (employees) complain bitterly about how the company for whom they slave are "not doing it right"! They flail-about, giving suggestion after suggestion about how their employer could be running THEIR business in a superior fashion for the employees.
Well, if you know better, then why don't you do what they did, and establish a company at your own financial risk and prove them wrong, rather that simply complaining about it to anyone who will listen, and many who don't?
Mortgage your house, sell your first-born to Mephistopheles, and see what it is like from "the other side of the coin".

I'll give you the example of a company where my younger brother works, because it sums up to me what's really wrong with certain corporate practices and views from the oh-so-called "heart and blood of the economy":

- The company where he works has a Quality Control department and a Finances department, like many big companies. The QC wants the clients to be satisfied (good service, individual care for each problem, you know the drill - "make the guy paying happy"); the Finances wants to reduce costs and increase the number of clients that each worker tends to, so they can get more money at the end of the month. So you have one department that wants the workers to be MORE engaged to the clients, and one that wants the LESS engaged. Those departments never talked about achieving a middle ground on that regard.

- The company's owners aren't involved with its daily routine. They don't know that there are shortage of tools sometimes, they don't know that sometimes clients have to wait on a workshop that doesn't have air conditioning (and I assure you, in the summer, this is a big no-no down there), they don't know that they have managers with opposite goals. If they know, they don't care.

- They hired a general manager that managed to put them in hot water, because they gave him total power to do whatever he wanted. One of the things that he wanted was to buy a new ERP software (something that they had to do, because they needed to padronize their software with other branches of the same company), pressured the company that sold the ERP to implement it in a few months without proper testing it with real data, and when things started to go to hell, threatened to fire anyone using the old, reliable system that wasn't charging clients $100k for a job that cost $50. After clients started to threaten people (many women broke down and cried one day because clients would threaten to punch them - I'm not making this shit up, they had to call security on more than a couple of guys), the guy finally admit that "they" (as in, "he and every shmuck working under him") made a "mistake" (as in, "fucked up beyond belief"). Oh, and he wasn't fired after tha, because you see, "the team has fucked up" (as in, "the guy we hired paying lots of money fucked up, but we can't blame everything on him or we'll look like a bunch of drooling idiots").

- They started a program of giving clients free stuff to increase sales, because that worked well on the American branches of the company. Except, Brazil is not America, and people went just to get the free stuff and didn't buy anything because that's how we roll in Third World. When it failed, they blamed on the guys doing the technical work because they didn't knew how to sell the extra crap among the free stuff (because tech guys should be amazing sellers, right?).

When my brother was telling me all this crap, I started to wonder why the higher-ups couldn't see the obvious flaws in their amazing plans (giving free stuff for nothing = bad, expecting tech people to act as sellers = bad, changing ERP software withour exhaustive testing = DOUPLE PLUS UNGOOD JUJU!), but it always amount to what you're saying: "I know what I'm doing because I'm risking my money and that somehow makes me special and smart, so shut up and do as I say or else I'll put you out of your misery and then you can see how hard it is to run a company". Well, you're not smart because you have money to invest in a company; you may be, but that doesn't make you an authority in every aspect of your business. MAH MONEY MAH RULEZ may work when you're raising children, but not when you have to raise adults.

[BarnOwl]

It's a fascinating yet simultaneously mundane story, that underlies the latest episode in the ongoing skeptic soap opera.
Pamela Gay's post seems to (intentionaly?) conflate a work related harassment investigation that has recently concluded, and a seperate incident from 2008 that she claims involves some famous skeptic trying to grope her. I'm pretty certain I've narrowed the possibilities of the latter incident to DragonCon 2008, and specifically to a party on Thurday night, the 30th of August.
On that night Phil Plait, the then head of the JREF, bumped into the SF author Scott Sigler, who invited him to a party.
Plait said he had 12 friends - No problem! Bring them along too!
The party was a themed event, namely 'Pimps and Ho's' (yes, another prostitute themed event) which explains many of the costumes you see in the photos I've posted already.
The party was being hosted by podcaster Evo Terra/Travis Unwin (the guy ogling Pamela Gay's left breast in this photo)
<snip>
There are a lot of photos of this event online and it's clear that there was copious amounts of alcohol consumed, lots of touching/hugging/groping going on. I'm guessing that there was a lot of play-acting happening (which explains the many silly photos of people mugging up to Scott Sigler in his pimp costume.)
At some stage something happened, it appears, between Pamela Gay and Michael Shermer.
We have photos of them together, posing for photos, with Shermer's arm around her.
<snip>
She claims he tried to grope her, but he says he didn't.
Others who were there seem to think he was very drunk and they seperated him from her and took him away.
I think it's safe to say he was probably drunk and acting the dick - although it is questionable whether he did anything (or tried to to anything) worse than was already happening at the party - or whether he just tried to give her a hug that was misinterpreted.
I wasn't there so I can't say what happened but I find it hard to make a firm pronouncement on the matter when no actual contact was made. Nearly groping someone, when no contact is made, can be very similar to nearly hugging them - and it's clear there was a lot of hugging going on at that party. Shermer is the only one who knows what he intended to do. Perhaps he intended to grab a breast in each hand, give them a squeeze and go "Waheeeyy!"
Or perhaps not.
<snip>

My cynical outsider's take on the above?

They're all a bunch of privileged, self-involved, toxically vain, bigoted, obnoxious twats with the impulse control of developmentally delayed juvenile chimpanzees. All of them.

[feralandproud]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... /#comments

Svan proving once again that if you look for something to be offended by, you'll probably find it. Comments are the usual circlejerk...

[feralandproud]

I forgot, also this:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... profiling/

I'm just curious if DIYM sent Avicenna mail, or if someone is cherry-picking here for their own purposes.

[Michael K Gray]

When my brother was telling me all this crap, I started to wonder why the higher-ups couldn't see the obvious flaws in their amazing plans (giving free stuff for nothing = bad, expecting tech people to act as sellers = bad, changing ERP software withour exhaustive testing = DOUPLE PLUS UNGOOD JUJU!), but it always amount to what you're saying: "I know what I'm doing because I'm risking my money and that somehow makes me special and smart, so shut up and do as I say or else I'll put you out of your misery and then you can see how hard it is to run a company". Well, you're not smart because you have money to invest in a company; you may be, but that doesn't make you an authority in every aspect of your business. MAH MONEY MAH RULEZ may work when you're raising children, but not when you have to raise adults.

Boy, have I triggered an avalanche of self-pity with that post!?
FYI: When I started My Company, I was in secondary school year 10, with nary a brass razoo to my name.
READ: NO MONEY TO INVEST.
I had to gain cash-flow via delivering the goods to my clients.

But with a drive and vision.

You are spouting nonsense.

So you can cut-out that bullshit guilt-trip.
I had negative money to invest, yet raised a child and employed whinging fuckers like you.
And paid their superannuation.
Fucking wage-slaves bitching about how they "could do it better than their employers', yet studiously avoiding taking that action annoy me, potentially more, than Rebecca Watson.

[Jan Steen]

You see how hard it is to replicate Bjarte's "absence of comedy"?
Even an annotated, monotone picture of a car engine is funnier than the shit he comes out with.

Didn't you call Bjarte Foshaug "as funny as a bag of acorns"?

You were wrong. A bag of acorns is much funnier.

Even a root canal operation is funnier.

[Tony Parsehole]

You see how hard it is to replicate Bjarte's "absence of comedy"?
Even an annotated, monotone picture of a car engine is funnier than the shit he comes out with.

Didn't you call Bjarte Foshaug "as funny as a bag of acorns"?

You were wrong. A bag of acorns is much funnier.

Even a root canal operation is funnier.

The suicide note of a special-needs child is funnier.

[TedDahlberg]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ns-twitter

"I reassure the tweeting twerps that I know the rules all too well." Tweeting twerps... every time I risk forgetting why I like Dawkins, he reminds me. And this:

What is it that renders some people incapable of conceiving how a person might be motivated not by narrow self-interest but by a public-spirited concern for the common weal?

I think that perfectly sums up FTB, Skepchick and others. An ironic lack of empathy, an inability or unwillingness to understand the motivations of others.

[Remick]

The world just cant handle a genius of Rebeccas caliber.

[youtube]hXud6iXXSqw[/youtube]

Usually I am with you on the gems you find on twitter, but I don't get this one. So she plays video games, so what? We should encourage her to do that, and leave everything else alone.

Who gives a fuck what she does with her spare time(regardless of how much 'spare' time she has).

She is just a politician that keeps getting people to vote for her. Is the problem really her, or is it that she is still invited to speak?

Once she hasn't spoken at an event for 2 years, no one is going to be paying her to write for them either.

It's not about the video games. It's about the Chutzpah of sending out the "Girl in Distress, Support Me" signal and e-begging for money, yet in a week telling everyone that you just beat the second hardest level in a game that takes a huge number of HOURS to play each session.

And despite all the claims of people who say they 'routinely beat' the Immortal level, the truth is that just one in five hundred Civ V game owners ever manage to beat the game on Immortal. Most give up (out of boredom) LONG before they get there because it takes a long time and a lot of maps before you 'get it down' and are good enough to take on the incredible cheating AI. (Unless you abuse something like ROP (patched out)).

So, it takes a HUGE amount of practice, plus a lot of luck, to beat that level.

And that's what the blue-haired She-Devil was doing (while running out of money) before she started her e-begging campaign. Which I find revolting as it's the exact opposite of how I live my life.

For example, when I was starting my CPA firm I could have e-begged people (or my relatives) for 'sponsorships' while using the 'sponsorhip' to sell dubious genetic testing kits then, later, bragged about my Civilization I score or some shit. But I didn't.

Instead of begging and whining I worked as a housekeeper (like Molly Maids). That's right, I fucking scrubbed toilets, cleaned dog-shit out of carpets, washed dishes, did windows and otherwise made sure rich slobs could come home, at least one day a week, to a clean house. And I did this as a licensed CPA with an MS in Accountancy from an elite accounting program.

That's why I criticize.

It's not games. I love games. I play all kinds of games. But I don't run around leeching off people because I'm too god-damn lazy or 'proud' to do shit work for a living to make ends meet. If scrubbing toilets is what I have to do, then scrubbing toilets is what I do. And I have done so. For an entire year I scrubbed toilets to make ends meet while I grew my firm.

And I've got friends, who are also professionals, who did the equivalent. Worked night jobs. Worked as a UPS truck loader. Worked as a delivery driver. Worked in fast food. Worked as waiters/waitresses. Whatever it took so they could grow their law firm or CPA firm or Architecture firm...

I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.

[Remick]

Just for the record, Napoleon Dynamite is one of the funniest films ever made but only after watching it at least twice.

Truth!

[Southern]

When my brother was telling me all this crap, I started to wonder why the higher-ups couldn't see the obvious flaws in their amazing plans (giving free stuff for nothing = bad, expecting tech people to act as sellers = bad, changing ERP software withour exhaustive testing = DOUPLE PLUS UNGOOD JUJU!), but it always amount to what you're saying: "I know what I'm doing because I'm risking my money and that somehow makes me special and smart, so shut up and do as I say or else I'll put you out of your misery and then you can see how hard it is to run a company". Well, you're not smart because you have money to invest in a company; you may be, but that doesn't make you an authority in every aspect of your business. MAH MONEY MAH RULEZ may work when you're raising children, but not when you have to raise adults.

Boy, have I triggered an avalanche of self-pity with that post!?
FYI: When I started My Company, I was in secondary school year 10, with nary a brass razoo to my name.
READ: NO MONEY TO INVEST.
I had to gain cash-flow via delivering the goods to my clients.

But with a drive and vision.

You are spouting nonsense.

So you can cut-out that bullshit guilt-trip.
I had negative money to invest, yet raised a child and employed whinging fuckers like you.
And paid their superannuation.
Fucking wage-slaves bitching about how they "could do it better than their employers', yet studiously avoiding taking that action annoy me, potentially more, than Rebecca Watson.

Whatever, doc. If you want to hear from the whining fucker that oh God you're so special, the here you have it: "Gee, Mr. Gray, you're so special! I wish one day I could grow to be just like you!". I'm a helper.

[Aneris]

I forgot, also this:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... profiling/

I'm just curious if DIYM sent Avicenna mail, or if someone is cherry-picking here for their own purposes.

Argh, my comment was eaten by stupid reloading of pages on the ipad. I hate that. (does anyone know how this can be switched off?).

In short, acording to google, avicenna posted an identical quote from the pit just one hour after it was posted here. I find the racist charge later utterly nonsensical when SJW highlight races all the time in both directions (black atheists whatever, white male cis, people of colour). I reject these notions, and consider them all racist (“colourblind” issue factored in) — but see its an american thing. But how come they're ignorant about it and as soon as its shown from another direction, they jump at it. It is like a blindspot.

And Zvan, yeah. Troll comments on twitter by two people transmute into “the Slymepit sez” (negative tweets/comments ones only, of course). If we play that game, they're all Rape Apologists among other things.

[Karmakin]

Re: The pictures of the party above.

Those people aren't just drunk. They are absolutely smashed.

[BillHamp]

And this is the Carrie Poppy thing isn't it? And Carrie presumably had permission to start blatting away, and TAM only cam into it because DJ and Phil were at the Party? And is Phil now a Groethe like enemy? Or just DJ? and ...... Jesus.

In the 2012 talk Gay actually holds Grothe's behaviour up as an example for stepping in. At least that's how I read it. Around 32:45:
"In my own life I actually had two guys, one of whom is here at this meeting, who've intervened with me when they've seen some other guy being a dick and and going to do something inappropriate. And you can be this person who physically intervenes."

So, give me a gig at your conference, you're my hero - don't invite me, breakdown is mine?

I always find it ironic that when it comes to taking action (not just verbal bitching), these SJW ALWAYS rely on a male to do the work. They talk a great talk about agency, but then display none of their own. They do NOTHING, even when it is their own asses on the line. It is simply amazing. They sit around and wait for someone else to step up and I think the reason they do is that actions can be criticized easily and they don't want to take that chance. The truth is, none of them can tell you what is "wrong" before hand. They can only criticize and judge in hindsight. That's why no one takes this shit seriously.

[feralandproud]

I forgot, also this:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... profiling/

I'm just curious if DIYM sent Avicenna mail, or if someone is cherry-picking here for their own purposes.

Argh, my comment was eaten by stupid reloading of pages on the ipad. I hate that. (does anyone know how this can be switched off?).

In short, acording to google, avicenna posted an identical quote from the pit just one hour after it was posted here. I find the racist charge later utterly nonsensical when SJW highlight races all the time in both directions (black atheists whatever, white male cis, people of colour). I reject these notions, and consider them all racist (“colourblind” issue factored in) — but see its an american thing. But how come they're ignorant about it and as soon as its shown from another direction, they jump at it. It is like a blindspot.

And Zvan, yeah. Troll comments on twitter by two people transmute into “the Slymepit sez” (negative tweets/comments ones only, of course). If we play that game, they're all Rape Apologists among other things.

What triggered this repulsive little display, I wonder? Are these friends and supporters of Shermer and Grothe? If so, I can only wish them both many more friends like these.

More or less, yes.
Better said, they are friends of anybody who is against FtB, Skepchick and social justice, especially feminism*. It doesn’t matter how vile it gets.

*They will apparently make an exception for TERFs. It’s more like the Hitler-Stalin Pakt. Or the Allied Forces in WWII. Anything goes as long as they have their enemy.

Critical thinking at it's finest! "If they don't like us, it's not because we're fucking horrible; it's because they're friends with the enemy!"

[justinvacula]

Council candidate ‘done’ with county politics
Michael Giamber said he was advised to avoid discussing specific issues during campaign

http://timesleader.com/news/local-news/ ... y-politics

After his second attempt to get on Luzerne County Council failed Tuesday, Michael Giamber destroyed his boxes and files of county records in a bonfire at his Fairmount Township property Wednesday morning.

Giamber said his election loss will probably add years to his life because he would have obsessively devoted most of his time the next four years to implementing changes in county government.

“I’m done. I won’t be involved in county government at any level anymore,” said Giamber, who got active supporting the county’s 2012 switch to home rule government and attending county meetings after he retired from a management position with the federal government and returned to the area.


Only if the usual suspects would follow his lead and stick the flounce...

[windy]

I don't know where to begin to parse the stupid, so I'll just ask why it's relevant that she's going to be "gorgeous"? It's quite obvious, from all of the many groping/harassment/RAEP stories that have been presented as blog posts, comments, #ripplesoftweetwoe, TAM talks, etc etc, that being "gorgeous" is not a prerequisite for being a target. Being a scientist or being "brilliant" at maths and physics isn't a requirement either. So why is that even part of the dialogue? If they're so disgusted with oppressive white patriarchoindustrialcomplex notions of beauty, why do they constantly conform to them and refer to dominant paradigms of physical attractiveness?

To quote from Pamela Gay's TAM speech again...

"I could move to another university – I could change which reality I’m in – but that would leave behind a university devoid of women role models who are capable in physics and computer science, the two fields that my students come from. I stay, and I try to be the example of a woman doing things that matter. I try to say Brains, Body, Both – it is possible even in computational astrophysics."

The link is to a George Hrab song, with lyrics like:

She can make my wick stick out my candle
she knows which one’s Haydn and which one is Handel
so put on a dress that barely fits
then shake your ass and show me your wits

Um, what does that have to do with studying astrophysics? :?

And speaking of George Hrab, is he still on good terms with the Skeptic Anti-sex League?

[Aneris]

Why come the sexism issues out now, and not in the middle of Elevatorgate? What is different now? To me it looks it like “stuff happened” at those parties, conferences and gatherings and people sometimes had a bit of a remorse afterwards when sober, when it escalated too much. However, they quickly moved on and it wasn't an issue. But now, as “sides” have emerged, and friendships have fallen apar, or it is no longer beneficial to curry favour with someone, those stories are perfect ammunition.

[Tigzy]

When my brother was telling me all this crap, I started to wonder why the higher-ups couldn't see the obvious flaws in their amazing plans (giving free stuff for nothing = bad, expecting tech people to act as sellers = bad, changing ERP software withour exhaustive testing = DOUPLE PLUS UNGOOD JUJU!), but it always amount to what you're saying: "I know what I'm doing because I'm risking my money and that somehow makes me special and smart, so shut up and do as I say or else I'll put you out of your misery and then you can see how hard it is to run a company". Well, you're not smart because you have money to invest in a company; you may be, but that doesn't make you an authority in every aspect of your business. MAH MONEY MAH RULEZ may work when you're raising children, but not when you have to raise adults.

Boy, have I triggered an avalanche of self-pity with that post!?
FYI: When I started My Company, I was in secondary school year 10, with nary a brass razoo to my name.
READ: NO MONEY TO INVEST.
I had to gain cash-flow via delivering the goods to my clients.

But with a drive and vision.

You are spouting nonsense.

So you can cut-out that bullshit guilt-trip.
I had negative money to invest, yet raised a child and employed whinging fuckers like you.
And paid their superannuation.
Fucking wage-slaves bitching about how they "could do it better than their employers', yet studiously avoiding taking that action annoy me, potentially more, than Rebecca Watson.

Whatever, doc. If you want to hear from the whining fucker that oh God you're so special, the here you have it: "Gee, Mr. Gray, you're so special! I wish one day I could grow to be just like you!". I'm a helper.

Nice one Southern - I was gonna respond MKG's typical 'know-it-all' bollocks meself, but you ninja'd me in fine style there.

It's just that that the silly old fart's spiel about 'well, why don't you try and start a business of your own then!' was exactly the same kind of crap an ex-boss of mine used to come out with. Of course, he didn't have to remortgage a house or take out any loans - he got a big payoff from his days as a wage-slave, after having been injured at work. Good for him that he used it to start a business - pity he didn't recommend what kind of serious injuries we whinging plebs should give ourselves in order to start one up. :lol:

Jesus, you must be one tiresome cunt of a boss to work for, MKG, if you're anything like IRL as you are on here - where you've achieved the rare distinction of actually being even more tedious than Steersman, but in fewer words.

[welch]

Pamela Gay is a scientist, yet her description of an event is a muddled, confusing hash of innuendo and feelings, padded with reenactments of scenes from BEACHES. Not until the 6th paragraph does she finally -- though fleetingly -- reveal the source of her angst: an attempted boob-grab at a party full of drunks. Until then, all we get is turgid bathos about unspecified bumps with the glass ceiling over her career.

It has already garnered the inevitable 'we empathize with your lived experience, sister' responses. But to persuade this skeptic as to the veracity of her story, Gay will have to do a better job telling it. So long as she uses the narrative style associated with claims of woo, I will lend it as much credence as claims of woo.

I have no doubt that in cases of harassment, reporting them can and does cause problems for the reporters. The documentation on this is pretty irrefutable and goes across decades. But, if you want to change behaviors, that's the risk you take. You have to ask yourself, "what's more important?"

If shermer groped her, (and regardless of personal opinion of anyone involved, grabbing someone's tits uninvited is assault. So's grabbing their arm for that matter. That aspect is pretty clear-cut) and she didn't call him a fuckstick because of his "power" then she made a decision: Shermer's imaginary chokehold over the skeptic movement was more important to her at that moment than her right to not be grabbed. She didn't want to risk being on the 'outs' and maybe not being invited back to TAM or whatever.

Okay, so she made that choice, and now regrets it.

Or maybe she just didn't think it was that bad. We don't know the context, we don't know anything other than hand a grabbed breast b. It may have been in malice, it may have been in bad comedy. At the time she decided "whatever".

Okay, so she made that choice and now regrets it.

But what's supposed to happen now? There's no fucking evidence other than she says yes and he says no. There does seem to be a building list of claims that indicate when Shermer gets too drunk, he turns into an asshole, but he's hardly unique there. There's an obvious way to mitigate that problem, but no one will spine up and do it.

EBW has pointed out that she's been on the end of years-long harassment/whisper campaigns that are remarkably similar to what is happening with Shermer, and that no, smoke does not always lead to fire, which is why she's such a hardass about evidence. That's a valid point to consider.

I don't think Pamela Gay is wrong for changing her mind about things, but I think her insistence that she's helpless because of power structure shows that while she'd like for things to be different, she's not going to take the risks to change them herself. I guess that's someone else's job? But whose?

At some point, you have to make a decision that the risks and dangers of changing things are less awful than things staying as they are. Clearly, that's not the case for her yet. But if you're not willing to take those risks, if you're not willing to walk up to someone and say "Last night, when you were drunk, you did some things that deeply offended me, and I would, at the very least, like an apology for them, and perhaps you should consider the way you behave when drunk as a reason to not get so drunk in the future." then don't get fucking mad when no one else will either.

If you are not going to stand up for your rights, even when there's a risk, why the fuck should anyone else.

To use a trope the SJW idiots love...if MLK and Malcom X had said "no, we have to wait for those in power to change things on their own, we're powerless", the Civil Rights movement would have had no results at all.

[Tribble]

I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.

zzzzzzzzzzzz Tone trolling is boring.

[welch]

Oh, hey, since the skeptical community is once again talking about how sexism 'is part of what it means to be a woman in science'-- I realized that I forgot to mention that the Godfather of Retrovirology I accused of 'artistically arranging data' during the XMRV fiasco 'retired' last month.

TYPICAL OLD-BOYS CLUB! DAMN YOU PATRIARCHY!!!!!

HOW DARE YOU FLAUNT YOUR WILLING TO TAKE RISKS TO DO THE RIGHT THING PRIVILEGE!

[welch]

Not taking sides with the Harris' profiling issue, but to my mind the only reasonable way to deal with that matter is from a systemic perspective, which came through partially in some arguments. There is a system designed to spot some people and it might apply some sort of heuristic. However the very moment it does, the suspects will dynamically react to the heuristic and evade it. It is almost like an evolutionary pressure. Therefore, any static approach won't work at all, as long as the suspects have means to adapt.

It must be viewed as an arms race and the interesting questions lie, in my opinion, somewhere in that area. There are costs for the search/profiling to adapt, and there are costs for the would-be-terrorists to adapt to whatever method is used at the moment.

Suppose (fictional example) terrorists are million times to one more likely middle aged men with arabian complexion, then it could be argued that a system that works with such a profile is good enough to prevent nearly all cases and indeed a waste of time to look for other people. However, real terrorism seems to fall into “black swan” events. It seems not the case that hundreds of terrorists run against the system, but very few, very planned attempts are made. The likelihoods above aren't very useful as the terrorist just can spent time looking for the right person that would most likely get through.

Therefore a totally random heuristic (or controlling everyone) seems to be the best strategy. But that crashes the moment terrorist start brute force (i.e. hundreds try to get through). Therefore, the best approach would be two layered and dynamic. Profilling to whatever is likely + total random control. The weight (which gets more resources) I would call impossible to determine from an arm-chair postion, but tells me enough for the discussion that This-Or-That and static approaches won't succeed.

If its a practical outcome we want then we are screwed. They will just *do something else* - bridges, buildings, power plants, cement trucks etc. who saw 911 coming?

Airport security is really there for three reasons - discourage the impulsive amateur and secondly reassure the public/cover-asses. Getting lucky and taking down a well planned effort is a distant, almost invisible third objective.

Both initial major imperatives are covered by targeting the most recent suspects. Given you can't ESP the future it also has the benefit of being the most rational approach given available evidence.

The irony is, by overly concentrating their efforts in a small area, they've created a target. Think of the screening areas in most major U.S. airports say, the day before thanksgiving or december 23rd. Small area, packed with people, still outside the security zone.

that is a terrifyingly target-rich environment. I'm more nervous about the security area than I am about the plane.

[German LurkBoatsman]

Dumbass edited her own quote, when the original is publicly available!

I guess she's found that random groping accusations have a much more receptive audience in skepticism than in astronomy. "A good story improves in the telling"

No, that's not exactly true. In the 2012 talk she just separated both accounts. She goes first with "had my ass slapped etc as an astronomer" and in a later part adds: also had my ass slapped, tits groped in this community (but, important, not at this TAM / not at TAM). So the stuff was all there in the 2012 telling.

[welch]

Pamela Gay's 2012 TAM talk she writes about is here:

[youtube]8WSNGCD3PJE[/youtube]

Oh My. I guess Gay didn't see what her speech would do. She specifically claimed, in public, that she was being sexually harassed at work. She claimed that this harassment was affecting her career. She left her bosses very little wiggle room.

I have managed people in a professional environment for more than 12 years. As a manager there are certain requirements I must adhere to. If I hear anyone in the organization claim they were harassed I must report it to Human Resources and my management. I am obliged to do this or I will risk my job and my career. This is very typical of employment in a professional setting.

So, Gay outs here fellow employees in public. Her management and the Human Resources department MUST take action. She has forced this. Apparently, she had very few witnesses who supported her claim. I am not saying her claim is not true, but I am saying she had her opportunity to be heard. Her management either had to take action against those harassing her, or they had to cast doubt on her story. They needed a resolution. She took the fall in this case. Very ugly all around.

The right approach is to bring any issues with harassment up to your HR department at the first sign of trouble. Usually, HR can put the harassers on notice and everyone will fix their behavior. I have seen this work many times. Many organizations have been sued and have lost millions over harassment. There are process safeguards in place to prevent this sort of problem from getting out of hand.

Ms. Gay - you really did a disservice to others. You need to help reinforce the right kind of behavior in the work environment. Take action to stop harassment immediately. Don't go public and cry about your problems to the world without first trying to fix it on a local level. Document any problems in writing. Take your complaint to management. Accept the apology of others and move on.

I so rarely agree with JD here that this may be a noteworthy event, but he is in fact, absolutely right. If you are being harassed in the workplace, THAT is where you need to deal with it. If you do not feel comfortable in going to your supervisor, GO TO HR. THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS HR IS FOR. If the behavior is not reported to them, there is literally nothing they can do about it.

The simpler version: If you don't tell the mechanic your car is broke, how the fuck are they supposed to fix it?

No, you may not get the resolution you want, but there will now be data. If the same person gets reported again, the chances of them being disciplined go up because of your report. Even if you "lose", you still "win". But you have to accept that you may not get your desired outcome if you report. However, (as I've said over and over) if you don't report, I guarantee you won't. If the harassment continues or gets worse because you reported, you have a remarkably wide array of legal options available to you.

Dr. Gay's meme of "I'm powerless" is simply bollocks. It's not easy to report, but that's not the same as powerless.

What got me about her session is that if that's the first time she even tried to report the problem, it shows she needs to work somewhere else, and quickly, because it's really clear she's working in an environment where she cannot trust anyone she works with or for. That may be the case, often people are assholes, and they run the company, and the company is an asshole factory. But even then, give it a shot. Report the behavior.

You are only as powerless as you choose to be.

[Trophy]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ns-twitter

"I reassure the tweeting twerps that I know the rules all too well." Tweeting twerps... every time I risk forgetting why I like Dawkins, he reminds me. And this:

What is it that renders some people incapable of conceiving how a person might be motivated not by narrow self-interest but by a public-spirited concern for the common weal?

I think that perfectly sums up FTB, Skepchick and others. An ironic lack of empathy, an inability or unwillingness to understand the motivations of others.

That was extremely well-written. I admit I giggled at some of those Dawkins jokes (I'm a sucker for any shoop joke that is mildly amusing) but I'll have to hang my head low in shame after reading this paragraph:

On another occasion, in 2009, I was commissioned by Prospect Magazine to fill its regular slot on "If I ruled the world". I wrote it on a plane, and began with an incident I'd just witnessed at Heathrow security. A young mother was distraught that the tub of ointment she needed for her child's eczema had been seized. ...
my motive was public-spirited, and now there was no question of self-interest because the fated ointment wasn't mine. The woman's experience had been a particular peg on which to hang a general point. Unfortunately, when I returned to make a similar point on Twitter this week, I foolishly chose a peg that was vulnerable to misinterpretation as self-interested. And the result was a puerile display of sniggering frivolity such as only Twitter can serve up.

[ReneeHendricks]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... /#comments

Svan proving once again that if you look for something to be offended by, you'll probably find it. Comments are the usual circlejerk...

I heard about this yesterday. What has me scratching my head is this - if she was searching for tweets regarding her husband's photography, exactly how did those tweets by Jack Rayner and LazySavant show? I did a quick Twitter search for "Ben Zvan" and then "#benzvan" and *neither* of those tweets showed up. It only works if she's searching for "Zvan". But even more curious is that she says she has (I assume) LazySavant blocked so his tweet would not have shown up in a search. Unless, of course, she decided to log out of her account and do a search. Which then indicates to me she was actually looking for shit being said about her.

Cry me a fucking river, SVanity.

[German LurkBoatsmans]

I don't know where to begin to parse the stupid, so I'll just ask why it's relevant that she's going to be "gorgeous"?

I wouldn't count out that what he means is his daughters inner gorgeousness. Which is a big step up from the usual FCn's inner gorgonness, so to speak.

[Dick Strawkins]

The irony is, by overly concentrating their efforts in a small area, they've created a target. Think of the screening areas in most major U.S. airports say, the day before thanksgiving or december 23rd. Small area, packed with people, still outside the security zone.

that is a terrifyingly target-rich environment. I'm more nervous about the security area than I am about the plane.

There was one attempt, in Glasgow I think, by a couple of terrorists with a home made car bomb that they tried (and failed) to drive through the doors of one of the terminals.

[Southern]

I know the civ series well, it is one of my fav's. I had a harder time beating Xcom Ironman impossible though.

I still don't see the point in criticizing her for playing video games. It comes off as petty and seems a little crazy to be honest. You can take jabs whenever she posts a shitty article or someone puts up a youtube vid of a shitty talk she gave. You could even reference videogames then. Something like, Hours spent on Civ 5:230, hours spent researching evo psych: 1/3 of plane ride to con.

Point out that she is lazy when her work shows it, shouldn't be to hard. But simply lashing out for her playing video games is stupid, and doesn't help.

It is like going after Setar because he plays video games. Him playing video games is not the issue.... I started to type out 'the' issue with setar, but that seems impossible.

What I got from that wasn't that people here were criticizing her for playing videogames. Hell, some Pitter (including myself) are gamers, "hardcore" or not, whatever.

The problem arises when you do that after begging for money on the internet, I think. You're begging people to solve your financial problems while not doing anything yourself about them. That's a lot of chutzpah, even if her "patrons" don't mind (I'm sure The Amazing Foshaulg doesn't care a bit).

Besides, isn't one of the main points of opposing religion that some religious douches con people on giving money while not doing anything of value for it? If it's suddenly not a problem anymore, why bother going after those Pentecostal types, or quacks? Their audience is just giving them their own money on their own volition. What is good for the Twatson is good for the Robertson.